To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Admission of California: Remarks of Mr. Cass, of Michigan: In Reply to the Reference to his Opinions on the Alleged Sovereign Power of Congress Over the Territories by Mr. Berrien, of Georgia. Delivered in the Senate of the United States, August 12, 1850

ADMISSION OF CALIFORNIA.
REMARKS
a-'J>
OF
CAS
5
OF MICHIGAN
5
IN REPLY
To the reference to his opinions on the alleged SOVEREIGN POWER
of Congress over the Territories by Mr. Berrien, of Georgia.
DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF TOE UNITED STATES, AUGUST 12, 1850.
When Mr. IJerrien closed, Mr. CASS rose and said :
Mr. President: The Senator from Georgia, at the commencement of his remarks, made an allusion to the doctrine I have maintained in relation to the general
power of Congress over the Territories. I rise to put myself right—not to defend
others from the charge implied in the assertion, that I am the only man in the
Senate, and almost the only citizen out of it, who does not believe, that this
Government has full and unlimited power over these Territories ; though I trust
there are many, both here and elsewhere, who have not so far forgotten the
faith of their fathers, as to acquiesce in such a monstrous assumption of arbitrary
power. Why, it is the very doctrine, and almost the very words, ofthe declaratory act of George III, which our fathers resisted successfully—first in argument,
and then in arms—that ins Majesty in Parliament has the right, by
STATUTE, TO BIND THE COLONIES IN ALL CASES WHATSOEVER. We Went to
war against this very assumption, invoking the great right of self-government,
and hallowed the principle we fought for by success, and made it the very
corner-stone of our institutions. And now, before all the generation ofthe men
of the Revolution has passed away, we are called upon to declare that our
majesty (this government) in Congress has the right, by statute, to bind the Territories in all cases whatsoever. And I am rather pointed at as a marked man,
and as almost the only one, who, in this middle ofthe nineteenth century, and in
this republican land, does not bow the knee to this political worship. I trust—I
am sure, indeed—that the Senator entirely misunderstands the sentiments of his
countrymen, and that there is not a mere remnant, but a vast majority, who repudiate such pretensions, and who believe, that internal legislation, without representation or natural affinity, is the very essence of arbitrary power. And a tremendous power it i^. It is claimed and exercised at St. Petersburg, at Vienna, and
at Constantinople, as well as at Washington ; and no matter by whom claimed,
or where exercised—whether by Sultan, Emperor, King, Parliament, or Congress—it is equally despotism, unsupported by the laws of God, or by the just
laws of man. Whence do you derive such a power? Put your finger upon a
single clause or word of the Constitution, if you can, which gives it to you.
Such a terrible means of oppression should not rest on shadowy implications, or
remote analogies, or on elementary words, employed by European writers. It
should have a visible, tangible foundation. It should be written in characters of
living lights that the oppressor and the oppressed may not be deceived as to the
power of the one, or the degradation of the other. And yet among the fifteen
reasons given for the exercise of this authority, there is not one, which, by any
rational construction, leads to such consequences. Fifteen reasons for the support of a power, which half that number of words would have conferred beyond
cavil or dispute ! That very fact is enough to destroy the pretension. Congress
shall have unlimited power over the Territories. This short and explicit clause
would have spared us many an argument, even if it had not spared the rights of
man. Instead of such a declaration, what is the fact 1 The Senator from Geor-
TOWERS, PRINTER.

ADMISSION OF CALIFORNIA.
REMARKS
a-'J>
OF
CAS
5
OF MICHIGAN
5
IN REPLY
To the reference to his opinions on the alleged SOVEREIGN POWER
of Congress over the Territories by Mr. Berrien, of Georgia.
DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF TOE UNITED STATES, AUGUST 12, 1850.
When Mr. IJerrien closed, Mr. CASS rose and said :
Mr. President: The Senator from Georgia, at the commencement of his remarks, made an allusion to the doctrine I have maintained in relation to the general
power of Congress over the Territories. I rise to put myself right—not to defend
others from the charge implied in the assertion, that I am the only man in the
Senate, and almost the only citizen out of it, who does not believe, that this
Government has full and unlimited power over these Territories ; though I trust
there are many, both here and elsewhere, who have not so far forgotten the
faith of their fathers, as to acquiesce in such a monstrous assumption of arbitrary
power. Why, it is the very doctrine, and almost the very words, ofthe declaratory act of George III, which our fathers resisted successfully—first in argument,
and then in arms—that ins Majesty in Parliament has the right, by
STATUTE, TO BIND THE COLONIES IN ALL CASES WHATSOEVER. We Went to
war against this very assumption, invoking the great right of self-government,
and hallowed the principle we fought for by success, and made it the very
corner-stone of our institutions. And now, before all the generation ofthe men
of the Revolution has passed away, we are called upon to declare that our
majesty (this government) in Congress has the right, by statute, to bind the Territories in all cases whatsoever. And I am rather pointed at as a marked man,
and as almost the only one, who, in this middle ofthe nineteenth century, and in
this republican land, does not bow the knee to this political worship. I trust—I
am sure, indeed—that the Senator entirely misunderstands the sentiments of his
countrymen, and that there is not a mere remnant, but a vast majority, who repudiate such pretensions, and who believe, that internal legislation, without representation or natural affinity, is the very essence of arbitrary power. And a tremendous power it i^. It is claimed and exercised at St. Petersburg, at Vienna, and
at Constantinople, as well as at Washington ; and no matter by whom claimed,
or where exercised—whether by Sultan, Emperor, King, Parliament, or Congress—it is equally despotism, unsupported by the laws of God, or by the just
laws of man. Whence do you derive such a power? Put your finger upon a
single clause or word of the Constitution, if you can, which gives it to you.
Such a terrible means of oppression should not rest on shadowy implications, or
remote analogies, or on elementary words, employed by European writers. It
should have a visible, tangible foundation. It should be written in characters of
living lights that the oppressor and the oppressed may not be deceived as to the
power of the one, or the degradation of the other. And yet among the fifteen
reasons given for the exercise of this authority, there is not one, which, by any
rational construction, leads to such consequences. Fifteen reasons for the support of a power, which half that number of words would have conferred beyond
cavil or dispute ! That very fact is enough to destroy the pretension. Congress
shall have unlimited power over the Territories. This short and explicit clause
would have spared us many an argument, even if it had not spared the rights of
man. Instead of such a declaration, what is the fact 1 The Senator from Geor-
TOWERS, PRINTER.